[Senate Report 107-345]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 761
107th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 107-345
======================================================================
THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SAFETY ACT OF 2002
_______
November 19, 2002.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Leahy, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany S. 2480]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the
bill (S. 2480) to amend title 18, United States Code, to exempt
qualified current and former law enforcement officers from
State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon, and
recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose..........................................................1
II. Background on the Legislation....................................2
III. Need for the Legislation.........................................2
IV. Hearings.........................................................5
V. Committee Consideration..........................................5
VI. Votes of the Committee...........................................6
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion.......................6
VIII.Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................7
IX. Regulatory Impact Statement......................................8
X. Minority View of Senator Kennedy.................................9
XI. Changes in Existing Law.........................................14
I. Purpose
The purpose of S. 2480, the ``Law Enforcement Officers
Safety Act of 2002,'' is to amend title 18, United States Code,
to authorize qualified off-duty law enforcement officers and
qualified retired law enforcement officers carrying the
photographic identification issued by the governmental agency
for which the individual is, or was, employed as a law
enforcement officer to carry a concealed firearm that has been
shipped or transported to interstate or foreign commerce. This
act, however, does not seek to supersede Federal law or limit
the laws of any State that permits private persons or entities
to prohibit or restrict the possessions of concealed firearms
on their property; or prohibits or restricts the possession of
firearms on any State or local government property,
installation, building, base, or park.
II. Background on the Legislation
The ``Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act,'' S. 2480, was
introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy and
Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Republican Member Hatch on
May 8, 2002. Forty-one Senators--including Senate Judiciary
Committee members Thurmond, McConnell, Edwards, Feinstein,
Grassley, Sessions, Brownback, Cantwell, DeWine and Kyl--have
cosponsored the bill in an effort to make communities safer and
to better protect law enforcement officers and their families.
Representative Randy ``Duke'' Cunningham first introduced
similar legislation in the 102nd Congress as the National
Police and Peace Officer Protection Act,'' H.R. 4897, which was
cosponsored by 15 House Members. It was referred to the House
Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice
for consideration, but the Subcommittee took no action on the
bills.
Representative Cunningham reintroduced versions of this
legislation in the House in the 103rd, 104th, 105th, 106th, and
107th Congresses. In the 105th Congress, as the ``Community
Protection Act,'' this legislation was ordered to be reported,
as amended, by voice vote by the House Judiciary Committee and
placed on the Union Calendar. No further action, however, was
taken on the bill in the 105th Congress. In 1999, the House of
Representatives adopted similar legislation, by a vote of 372-
53, as a floor amendment during its gun safety debate before
the overall legislation was defeated.
For the 107th Congress, Representative Cunningham
reintroduced the ``Community Protection Act,'' H.R. 218 on
January 3, 2001, and it has garnered 268 cosponsors. On
November 11, 2001, a motion was filed to discharge the Rules
Committee from consideration of H. Res. 271, which provides for
the consideration of H.R. 218. The discharge petition (No. 107-
4) presently has 46 of the required 218 signatures for further
action.
III. Need for the Legislation
Chairman Leahy introduced the ``Local Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act'' in the Senate at the request of the
National President of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP),
Lieutenant Steve Young of Ohio. Lt. Young and the FOP have long
dedicated themselves to this matter, and led the campaign to
focus Congress on this measure that will help make our
communities safer and protect those who are sworn to guard and
serve the American public.
Law enforcement officers are never ``off-duty.'' They are
dedicated public servants trained to uphold the law and keep
the peace. When there is a threat to the peace or to our public
safety, law enforcement officers are sworn to answer that call.
The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act enables law enforcement
officers nationwide to be armed and prepared when they answer
that call, no matter where, when, or in what form it comes.
There are approximately 740,000 sworn law enforcement
officers currently serving in the United States. Since the
first recorded police death in 1792, there have been more than
16,200 law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty. A
total of 1,800 law enforcement officers died in the line of
duty over the last decade, an average of 180 deaths per year.
In 2001 alone, there were 232 police deaths, representing a 49-
percent increase from the 156 officers who died in 2000.
Roughly 5 percent of officers who die are killed taking law
enforcement action while in an off-duty capacity. On average,
more than 62,000 law enforcement officers are assaulted each
year, resulting in some 21,000 injuries.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc.'' See http://
www.odmp.org/. See also ``Law Enforcement Officers Killed and
Assaulted--2001 (Preliminary).'' U.S. Department of Justice, Federal
Bureau of Investigations, Uniform Crime Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While a police officer may not remember the name and face
of every criminal he or she has locked behind bars, criminals
often have long and exacting memories. A law enforcement
officer is a target in uniform and out; active and retired; on
duty and off.
The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2002 is designed
to protect officers and their families from vindictive
criminals, and to allow thousands of equipped, trained and
certified law enforcement officers, whether on-duty, off-duty
or retired, to carry concealed firearms in most situations,
thus enabling them to respond immediately to a crime across
State and other jurisdictional lines.
As Lt. Steve Young stated in his July 23, 2002, testimony
before the Senate Judiciary Committee:
Among the many tools of a professional law
enforcement officer are the badge and the gun. The
badge symbolizes the officer's authority and, in worst-
case scenarios, the gun enforces that authority. These
tools are given to the officer in trust by the public
to enforce the peace and fight crime. In asking
Congress to pass this bill, we seek a measured
extension of that trust. In certain emergency
circumstances, an officer's knowledge and training
would be rendered virtually useless without a firearm,
as would his ability to provide for his own self-
defense or that of his family. This bill will provide
the means for law enforcement officers to enforce the
law, keep the peace and respond to crisis situations by
enabling them to put to use that training and answer
the call to duty when need arises.
Today, a complex patchwork of Federal, State, and local
laws govern the carrying of concealed firearms for current and
retired law enforcement officers. Many members of the law
enforcement community, including the FOP, the National
Association of Police Officers (NAPO), Federal Law Enforcement
Officers Association (FLEOA), and International Brotherhood of
Police Officers (IBPO), believe that national legislation is
necessary because of this patchwork of conceal-carry laws. This
bill addresses this need by establishing national measures of
uniformity and consistency to permit law enforcement officers
to respond immediately to a crime when off duty, as well as to
protect officers and their families from vindictive criminals.
The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act creates a mechanism
by which law enforcement officers may travel interstate with a
firearm. Qualified active-duty law enforcement officers will be
permitted to travel interstate with a firearm subject to
certain limitations and provided that officers are carrying
their official badges and photographic identification.
Generally, an active-duty officer is qualified to carry a
concealed firearm under S. 2480 if he or she is authorized to
engage in or supervise any violation of law, is authorized to
carry a firearm at all times, is not subject to any
disciplinary action by the agency, and meets any agency
standards with respect to qualification with a firearm. A
qualified active-duty officer may not, however, carry a
concealed firearm on any privately owned lands if the owner
prohibits or restricts such possession. A qualified officer
also may not carry a firearm on any State or local government
property, installation, building, base, or park. In his or her
official capacity, though, a law enforcement officer is
permitted to carry weapons whenever Federal, State, or local
law allows. This bill is not intended to interfere with any law
enforcement officer's right to carry a concealed firearm, on
private or government property, while on duty or in the course
of official business.
Off-duty and retired officers should also be permitted to
carry their firearms across State and other jurisdictional
lines, at no cost to taxpayers, in order better to serve and
protect our communities. The Law Enforcement Officers Safety
Act would permit qualified law enforcement officers and
qualified retired law enforcement officers across the Nation to
carry concealed firearms in most situations. It also preserves,
however, any State law that permits citizens from restricting a
concealed firearm on private property and preserves any State
law that restricts the possession of a firearm on State or
local government property.
In order to qualify for the bill's exemptions in permitting
a qualified off-duty law enforcement officer to carry a
concealed firearm notwithstanding the law of the State or
political subdivision of the State, a qualified off-duty law
enforcement officer must be authorized to use a firearm by the
law enforcement agency where he or she works, not be subject to
any disciplinary action, meet the standards of the agency to
regularly use a firearm, not be prohibited by Federal law from
receiving a firearm, and be carrying a photo identification
issued by the agency. The bill preserves any State law that
restricts concealed firearms on private property, and preserves
any State law that restricts the possession of a firearm on
State or local government property or park.
For a retired law enforcement officer to qualify for
exemption from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed
firearms, he or she must have retired in good standing, have
been qualified by the agency to carry or use a firearm, have
been employed at least 15 years as a law enforcement officer
unless forced to retire due to a service-connected disability,
have a nonforfeitable right to retirement plan benefits of the
law enforcement agency, meet the same State firearms training
and qualifications as an active officer, not be prohibited by
Federal law from receiving a firearm, and be carrying a photo
identification issued by the agency. This section preserves any
State law that restricts concealed firearms on private property
and preserves any State law that restricts the possession of a
firearm on State or local government property or park.
IV. Hearings
The Senate Judiciary Committee held one hearing on ``The
Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, S. 2480,'' on July 23,
2002. Testimony was received from six witnesses, including
Senator Max Baucus of Montana and Representative Cunningham.
The other witnesses were: Lt. Steve Young, national president
of the Fraternal Order of Police; Mr. Arthur Gordon, a national
executive board member of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers
Association; Deputy Chief of Police David Johnson of the Cedar
Rapids Police Department in Cedar Rapids, IA; and Col. Lonnie
J. Westphal, chief of the Colorado State Patrol.
V. Committee Consideration
On September 19, 2002, the Judiciary Committee met in open
and executive session to consider S. 2480, the ``Law
Enforcement Officers Safety Act.''
The Committee approved by voice vote an amendment
introduced by Senator Durbin. The Durbin amendment increased
the service requirement for a retired officer to qualify to
carry a concealed firearm under the bill from 5 years to 15
years of regular employment for a law enforcement agency. The
Durbin amendment also requires retired officers to meet the
same firearms training qualifications as active law enforcement
officers. Finally, the Durbin amendment makes it explicit that
an active officer does not qualify under the bill if he or she
is prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
Senator Kennedy offered an amendment to bar officers from
carrying a concealed firearm into another State unless they
were permitted to carry that particular firearm while on active
duty. The Committee, on a 9 to 9 rollcall vote, defeated this
amendment. The Committee did not complete consideration of S.
2480 on September 19.
On October 8, 2002, the Committee continued consideration
of S. 2480 but did not complete consideration of the bill.
On November 14, 2002, the Committee adopted, without
objection, an amendment by Chairman Leahy and Senator Hatch to
clarify that the legislation does not cover any machine gun (as
defined in section 5845 of title 26), any firearm silencer (as
defined in section 921 of title 18) and any destructive device
(as defined in section 921 of title 18). The Committee then
ordered the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act to be reported
favorably to the full Senate, with Senator Kennedy dissenting,
with a recommendation that the bill do pass.
VI. Votes of the Committee
The Committee approved by voice vote the amendment by
Senator Durbin.
The rollcall vote on the amendment by Senator Kennedy
barring officers from carrying any concealed firearm unless the
officer was authorized and qualified to carry that same firearm
was as follows:
Tally: 9 Yes, 9 No, 1 Not Voting
Democrats (10)
N Leahy (D-VT.)
Y Kennedy (D-Mass.)
Y Biden (D-Del.)
Y Kohl (D-Wis.)
Y Feinstein (D-Calif.)
Y Feingold (D-Wis.)
Y Schumer (D-N.Y.)
Y Durbin (D-Ill.)
Y Cantwell (D-Wash.)
NV Edwards (D-N.C.)
Republicans (9)
N Hatch (R-Utah)
N Thurmond (R-S.C.)
N Grassley (R-Iowa)
Y Specter (R-Pa.)
N Kyl (R-Ariz.)
N DeWine (R-Ohio)
N Sessions (R-Ala.)
N Brownback (R-Kan.)
N McConnell (R-Ky.)
The Committee approved without objection the amendment by
Senator Leahy and Senator Hatch regarding the types of firearms
covered by the legislation.
The Committee then ordered the Law Enforcement Officers
Safety Act, as amended, to be reported favorably to the full
Senate, with Senator Kennedy dissenting, with a recommendation
that the bill do pass.
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 provides that the short title of the bill shall
be the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2002.
Section 2. Exemption of qualified law enforcement officers from State
law prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms
Section 2 would permit qualified law enforcement officers
to carry a concealed firearm notwithstanding the law of the
State or political subdivision of the State. A qualified law
enforcement officer under this section must be authorized to
use a firearm by the law enforcement agency where he or she
works, not be subject to any disciplinary action, meet the
standards of the agency to regularly use a firearm, not be
prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm, and be
carrying a photo identification issued by the agency. This
section preserves any State law that restricts concealed
firearms on private property and preserves any State law that
restricts the possession of a firearm on State or local
government property or park. This section does not supercede
any other Federal law.
Section 3. Exemption of qualified retired law enforcement officers from
State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms
Section 3 would permit a qualified retired law enforcement
officer to carry a concealed firearm notwithstanding the law of
the State or political subdivision of the State. A qualified
retired law enforcement officer under this section must have
retired in good standing, have been qualified by the agency to
carry or use a firearm, have been employed at least 15 years as
a law enforcement officer unless forced to retire due to a
service-connected disability, have a nonforfeitable right to
retirement plan benefits of the law enforcement agency,
annually meet State firearms training and qualifications that
are the same as active law enforcement officers, not be
prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm, and be
carrying a photo identification issued by the agency. This
section preserves any State law that permits or restricts
concealed firearms on private property and preserves any State
law that restricts the possession of a firearm on State or
local government property or park. This section does not
supercede any other Federal law.
VIII. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
standing rules of the Senate, the Committee sets forth, with
respect to the bill, S. 2480, the following estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, November 19, 2002.
Hon. Patrick J. Leahy,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2480, the Law
Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2002.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Mark
Grabowicz (for federal costs) and Angela Seitz (for the state
and local impact).
Sincerely,
Robert A. Sunshine
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
S. 2480--Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2002
S. 2480 would exempt certain current and former law
enforcement officers from state laws prohibiting the carrying
of concealed handguns. CBO estimates that the bill would have
no impact on federal spending. The legislation would not affect
direct spending or receipts.
S. 2480 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) because it
would preempt certain state and local laws that prohibit
carrying concealed weapons. CBO estimates that complying with
that mandate would result in no direct costs to state and local
governments, and thus the costs of that mandate would not
exceed the threshold established by that act ($58 million in
2002, adjusted annually for inflation). S. 2480 contains no new
private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz
(for federal costs) and Angela Seitz (for the impact on state
and local governments). This estimate was approved by Peter H.
Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
IX. Regulatory Impact Statement
In compliance with paragraph 11(b)(1), rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee, after due
consideration, concludes that S. 2480 will not have significant
regulatory impact.
X. MINORITY VIEW OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY
The horrific sniper shootings in Maryland, Virginia, and
the District of Columbia in October 2002 called our attention
once again to the problem of gun violence facing our nation:
the pointless injury and loss of life, the families that are
ripped apart, the communities consumed in fear. Tens of
thousands of people in the United States die from gunshot
wounds each year. The rate of firearm deaths among children is
nearly twelve times higher in the United States than in other
industrial countries.
The national response to this death toll has been minimal.
Americans overwhelmingly favor responsible gun-safety measures.
Nevertheless, Congress has to this point failed to close the
``gun show loophole,'' which allows firearms to be purchased
illegally at gun shows, no questions asked. Similarly, efforts
to enact a national ballistic tracking system, which would
strengthen the ability of law enforcement to catch serial
killers, have stalled.
Instead of pursuing such needed gun-safety measures, the
Judiciary Committee has passed S. 2480, the ``Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act,'' a bill that would undermine gun-safety
laws that have been passed by State and local governments. It
is a giant step in the wrong direction.
The Majority argues that S. 2480 is necessary to protect
active and retired officers and their families from
``vindictive'' criminals. It points to ``a complex patchwork of
Federal, state and local laws'' that govern the carrying of
concealed weapons. However, while the safety of police officers
is a goal of the highest importance, there is no evidence that
a national override of State and local gun-safety laws is
necessary to achieve this goal.
The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the primary supporter
of this bill, has submitted two lists of officers and prison
guards who were killed while off-duty or retired. The stories
of these slain men and women are tragic. Their killers deserve
to be severely punished. But not one of these incidents
involved an officer who was killed outside his or her home
state. Indeed, these lists show that States and local
governments are best equipped to implement policies,
regulations, and laws that protect the safety of their own law
enforcement officers, and also protect the public at large.
Consider one of the FOP's most recent examples. In New
Jersey, retired police chief John Deventer was shot while
heroically trying to stop a robbery. This incident prompted New
Jersey to enact a law allowing retired officers to carry
handguns under a number of conditions. In drafting this law,
now codified at N.J.S.A. 2C:39-6(1), the New Jersey legislature
made a deliberate effort to balance the safety of police
officers with the safety of the public at large. The Majority
offers no reason why Congress shall second-guess this State's
decision, or the considered judgment of any other State--
particularly when S. 2480 fails to provide the basic safeguards
that the New Jersey legislature considered necessary even in
the wake of Chief Deventer's shooting. Unlike New Jersey's
statute, S. 2480:
does not set a maximum age;
does not have an annual application process;
does not require retirees to list all their
guns;
does not give police departments discretion
to deny permits; and
is not limited to handguns.
A comparison of the balanced New Jersey statute with the
sweeping approach of S. 2480 argues against, not for, enactment
of this federal legislation.
The Majority claims that it is advancing the interests of
law enforcement by allowing off-duty and retired officers ``to
carry their firearms across State and other jurisdiction lines
* * * in order better to serve and protect our communities.'' I
strongly favor giving State and local police departments all
the resources they need to fight and prevent crime. I am proud
to have played a leading role in increasing by more than
100,000 the number of police officers in our communities
through the 1994 Crime Act. I question, however, the Majority's
assertion that communities will be safer if we override gun-
safety laws for the purpose of arming out-of-State off-duty and
retired police officers. The evidence is to the contrary.
S. 2480 is strongly opposed by the Police Executive
Research Forum and the International Association of Chiefs of
Police (IACP). These law enforcement organizations understand
the potential of this bill to undermine the safety of our
communities and the safety of police officers. As Colonel
Lonnie Westphal of the IACP stated in testimony to our
Committee in July:
[O]ne of the reasons that this legislation is
especially troubling to our nation's law enforcement
executives is because [it] could in fact threaten the
safety of police officers by creating tragic situations
where officers from other jurisdictions are wounded or
killed by the local officers. Police Departments
throughout the nation train their officers to respond
as a team to dangerous situations. This teamwork
requires months of training to develop and provides the
officers with an understanding of how their coworkers
will respond when faced with different situations.
Injecting an armed, unknown officer, who has received
different training and is operating under different
assumptions, can turn an already dangerous situation
deadly.
S. 2480 does not simply override State law for active
police officers. It does so for retired officers also--and,
indeed, for anyone who has served in a law enforcement capacity
for fifteen years in the ``aggregate''--before resigning and
moving on to a different job. There is no requirement that a
retiree demonstrate a special need for a firearm.
While S. 2480 provides that an officer must have
technically left law enforcement in ``good standing,'' it is
well known that sub-par employees can be released from their
jobs without a formal finding of misconduct. This bill does not
draw a distinction between officers who served ably and those
who did not. Officers who retire in ``good standing'' while
under investigation for domestic violence, racial profiling,
excessive force, or substance abuse could still qualify for
broad concealed-carry authority for the rest of their lives.
Furthermore, as the IACP has observed:
[T]his legislation fails to take into account those
officers who have retired under threat of disciplinary
action or dismissal for emotional problems that did not
rise to the level of ``mental instability.'' Officers
who retire or quit just prior to a disciplinary or
competency hearing may still be eligible for benefits
and appear to have left the agency in good standing.
Even a police officer who retires with exceptional
skills today may be stricken with an illness or other
problem that makes him or her unfit to carry a
concealed weapon, but they will not be overseen by a
police management structure that identifies such
problems in current officers.
Indeed, although Senator Durbin's amendment of September 19
clarified somewhat the firearms training standards that retired
officers must meet, these officers will not be subject to any
continuing police department policies or guidelines. Thus, if
it passes this bill, Congress will be effectively extending to
former police officers greater authority to carry concealed
weapons than it extends to active police officers.
Furthermore, in granting off-duty and retired police
officers broad authority to violate State and local gun-safety
laws, S. 2480 is not limited to the carrying of officers'
authorized weapons. In most police departments, officers may
seek authorization to carry a range of weapons. If an officer
wants to carry a weapon other than his service weapon--
typically, a nine-millimeter semi-automatic pistol--he must
show that he is qualified before the department will authorize
him to carry it. To be qualified, the officer must demonstrate
that he can handle that weapon safely.
Rather than limiting itself to authorized weapons, the
initial version of S. 2480 provided that so long as an officer
received authorization to carry a particular kind of firearm
(such as his service weapon), he could carry concealed any
other kind of firearm while off-duty or retired--even if he
never received authorization from his own police department to
carry that weapon, and regardless of all applicable State and
local laws. Even worse, under federal law the term ``firearm''
is defined extremely broadly. It includes ``any weapon
(including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may
readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an
explosive''--and ``any destructive device.'' 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 921(a)(3). Thus, under the initial version of S. 2480, so
long as an officer had been at some point authorized to use his
service weapon on the job, he could carry a concealed bomb or
grenade while off-duty.
On September 19, 2002, I introduced an amendment providing
that an off-duty or retired officer could carry a concealed
firearm only if he had been authorized to carry that firearm by
the agency he works for, or if he had been so authorized at the
time of his retirement. The Committee rejected this amendment
by an evenly divided 9-9 vote.
On November 14, the Committee adopted without objection an
amendment by Chairman Leahy and Senator Hatch providing that S.
2480 does not authorize the carrying of machine guns,
silencers, and destructive devices such as bombs and grenades.
This amendment takes a step in the direction of common sense.
Clearly, no civilian--not even an off-duty or retired police
officer--needs to carry a machine gun, bomb, or grenade. It is
equally clear, however, that off-duty and retired officers do
not need to carry concealed shotguns or long-range sniper
rifles. S. 2480 will still override State and local laws that
prohibit such dangerous weapons, and will still allow off-duty
and retired officers to carry a wide range of weapons which
their own police departments do not allow them to carry. The
idea that Americans will be safer if we allow more people to
carry such weapons is pure fiction.
S. 2480 does little to preserve ``safe harbors'' from gun
violence that currently exist under State and local laws. Many
States and local governments now single out places as needing
special protection from the scourge of gun violence. Michigan,
for example, prohibits concealed firearms in schools, sports
arenas, bars, churches, and hospitals. Georgia law allows
active and retired police officers to carry firearms in
publicly owned buildings, but not in churches, sports arenas,
or places where alcohol is sold. Kentucky prohibits carrying
concealed firearms in government buildings, bars, and schools.
South Carolina prohibits concealed firearms at school athletic
events, churches, and hospitals. Rochester, New York, prohibits
guns in government buildings, on school property, and in public
parks. Cincinnati prohibits carrying deadly weapons on school
property.
Inexplicably, S. 2480 overrides all local gun-safety laws,
without exception. In the 1990's, cities like Boston and New
York made great strides in the fight against crime precisely
because they were able to pass laws that addressed the factors
that lead to violence--including the prevalence of firearms in
inner cities. As Congressman Henry Hyde has observed, ``the
best decisions on fighting crime are made at the local level.''
By overriding all local gun-safety laws, S. 2480 will undermine
the ability of cities to fight crime.
Even at the State level, S. 2480 will override most ``safe
harbor'' laws. For example, it will override State laws that
categorically prohibit guns in churches and other houses of
worship, since only laws that permit private entities to post
signs prohibiting concealed firearms on their property will
remain in force. In most States, churches are not currently
required to post signs in order to secure a gun-free zone. S.
2480 also overrides laws that prohibit concealed weapons in
places where alcohol is served. Surely, it is reasonable for a
State to prohibit people from bringing guns into bars, to
prevent the extreme danger that results when liquor and
firearms are mixed.
Massachusetts has some of the strictest gun-safety laws in
the country, including a comprehensive ban on carrying
concealed weapons without a permit. The decision to grant a
permit lies in the discretion of local law enforcement
officials. Massachusetts has taken strong steps to protect our
citizens, our children, and our communities, and the results
are clear. The firearm death rate in the State is well below
the national average.
There is simply no reason for Congress to second-guess the
judgment of Massachusetts, Michigan, Georgia, Kentucky, South
Carolina, or any other State when it comes to protecting its
citizens from gun violence. Each State and local government
should be allowed to reach its own judgment as to where
citizens and out-of-State visitors may carry concealed
weapons--and whether active or retired law enforcement officers
should be included in or exempted from any prohibition. In the
words of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, it
is ``essential that state and local governments maintain the
ability to legislate concealed carry laws that best fit the
needs of their communities.''
For all of these reasons, I oppose S. 2480.
Ted Kennedy.
XI. Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
S. 2480, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman);
UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Part Section
I. CRIMES................................................. 1
* * * * * * *
PART I--CRIMES
Chapter Section
1. General provisions..................................... 1
* * * * * * *
44. Firearms.............................................. 921
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 44--FIREARMS
Sec.
921. Definitions.
* * * * * * *
926. Rules and regulations.
926A. Interstate transportation of firearms.
926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
officers.
926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement officers.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule
or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof,
any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from
transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be
entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any
place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if,
during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither
the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily
accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger
compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the
case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the
driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be
contained in a locked container other than the glove
compartment or console.
Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
officers
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any
State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who
is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the
identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed
firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or
foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).
(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or
limit the laws of any State that--
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their
property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms
on any State or local government property,
installation, building, base, or park.
(c) As used in this section, the term ``qualified law
enforcement officer'' means an employee of a governmental
agency who--
(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise
the prevention, detection, investigation, or
prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for
any violation of law, and has statutory powers of
arrest;
(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by
the agency;
(4) meets standards, if any, established by the
agency which require the employee to regularly qualify
in the use of a firearm; and
(5) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.
(d) The identification required by this subsection is the
photographic identification issued by the government agency for
which the individual is, or was, employed as a law enforcement
officer.
(e) Defined Term.--As used in this section, the term
``firearm'' does not include--
(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of
title 26);
(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921);
and
(3) any destructive device (as defined in section
921).
Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement officers
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any
State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who
is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is
carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may
carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported
in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).
(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or
limit the laws of any State that--
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their
property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms
on any State or local government property,
installation, building, base, or park.
(c) As used in this section, the term ``qualified retired
law enforcement officer'' means an individual who--
(1) retired in good standing from service with a
public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than
for reasons of mental instability;
(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to
engage in or supervise the prevention, detection,
investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration
of any person for, any violation of law, and had
statutory powers of arrest;
(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed
as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15
years or more; or
(B) retired from service with such agency, after
completing any applicable probationary period of such
service, due to a service-connected disability, as
determined by such agency;
(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the
retirement plan of the agency;
(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met,
at the expense of the individual, the State's standards
for training and qualification for active law
enforcement officers to carry firearms; and
(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.
(d) The identification required by this subsection is
photographic identification issued by the agency for which the
individual was employed as a law enforcement officer.
(e) Defined Term.--As used in this section, the term
``firearm'' does not include--
(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of
title 26);
(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921);
and
(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921).
* * * * * * *